Traffic can be a touchy subject for bloggers. Most writers know the pain of pouring a lot of effort into a project that gets little traction. On the flip side, although clicks are always welcome, seeing a post take off is not as satisfying when you are less invested in the piece. The most-viewed post in nearly 10 years of Bleeding Heartland’s existence was nothing special, just another opinion poll write-up. FYI: A good way to get the Drudge Report to link to your site is to type up a long list of negative statements about Hillary Clinton.

I’ve never compiled a year-end list like this before, but since people occasionally ask what material is most popular at the blog, I figured, why not start a new tradition? Ulterior motive: I hope more readers will be inspired to write for Bleeding Heartland in 2017 after learning that guest authors wrote some of this year’s most-viewed posts, including the one at the very top.

Follow me after the jump for the sixteen posts that generated the most traffic in 2016. Some of the results surprised me.

State Representative David Dawson announced today that he will not seek a third term in Iowa House district 14. I enclose below a news release he posted on Facebook at approximately 6:00 pm on March 18. Although I am on the press distribution list for the Iowa House Democrats, at this writing I have not received the statement by e-mail. Earlier today, Timothy Kacena filed for the Democratic nomination in the district, which covers the west side of Sioux City in Woodbury County (scroll down to view a map). I have not received a press release announcing Kacena’s candidacy, though it is not unusual for several days to pass between a campaign launch and the House Democrats e-mailing a statement about the race.

I have not found a campaign website or Facebook page for Kacena. He appears to have retired from Sioux City Fire Rescue. When I reached him by phone this evening, Kacena declined to comment on whether he is personally acquainted with Dawson or when he was recruited to run for House district 14. Most Iowa politics watchers had no idea until today that Dawson was not planning to seek re-election. No one who didn’t have advance notice could have collected 50 signatures and driven from Sioux City to Des Moines in time to file for the primary ballot by the close of business. Kacena will face Robert Henderson, who filed today for the GOP nomination in the district.

I am seeking comment from Dawson on why he didn’t announce his retirement earlier, whether he is acquainted with Kacena, whether he recruited him for this seat, and if so, when they first talked about the race. If I hear back, I will update this post. The photo accompanying today’s Facebook post shows Dawson with three young children. Spending several months a year in Des Moines is demanding work, taking a lot of time away from lawmakers’ families. Opting out is an understandable decision, and for all I know it may have been a last-minute call for Dawson. While I don’t begrudge anyone that choice, I wish state legislators would let it be known that they are wavering on a re-election bid, so others have a chance to consider running for public office in an open seat.

Dawson is the third Iowa House Democrat in as many days to announce a surprise retirement. As Bleeding Heartland discussed here, State Representative Nancy Dunkel revealed her plans on Wednesday, the same day Tom Stecher declared his candidacy in House district 57. State Representative Deborah Berry disclosed Thursday that she will not seek another term in House district 62. Ras Smith filed to run in that heavily Democratic seat the same day. At this writing, neither Berry nor Smith have returned my phone calls or responded to my e-mails asking questions such as: How did they become acquainted? When did they first discuss her retirement and his possible candidacy?

I have received some pushback on this post, but even more encouragement from activists who are as disappointed by the insider dealing as I am. Iowa Democratic leaders seeking more grassroots involvement should think about the message these last-minute handovers send to ordinary people about the political process.

I learned today that California law extends the filing period by five days if a state legislative incumbent does not file for re-election. Five days isn’t “enough” time to give serious consideration to a campaign, but it would be better than nothing. The Iowa House and Senate should adopt similar language to prevent insiders from treating a seat in the public’s house like a private club membership.

UPDATE: Mentioned in the previous post but should add here as well that Nebraska law sets an earlier filing deadline for incumbents across the board. Iowa could adopt that approach rather than California’s.

As a grassroots activist in Woodbury County, I can assure you that the only people cut out of the loop were the [R]epublicans. The search for Dave’s successor ranged far and wide. Anyone with any association with the party who had ever expressed an interest in running, and several who hadn’t, was approached. This was not decided in some smoke filled backroom.

THIRD UPDATE: Democratic State Representative Brian Meyer posted this revealing comment on March 20: “I can assure you everyone knew about the retirements well in advance. It was not nothing [sic] wrong with anything my leadership did. It is hard to find candidates.”

Note Meyer’s use of the word “everyone,” apparently to connote members of the Iowa House Democratic caucus and select party activists. Clearly “everyone” did not know about the lawmakers’ impending retirements. On the contrary, I have heard two separate reports of people directly asking Dunkel about her plans, coming away with the impression that she was seeking a third term.

Meyer’s comment assumes recruiting candidates is a job for leaders before a vacancy becomes public knowledge. His perspective does not acknowledge any benefit to an open process, where people who want to run for office can come forward, even if leaders don’t know about them or prefer other prospects. Relevant background information: when former House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy resigned in 2013, leaving a safe Democratic seat open in the middle of a term, three Democrats announced their candidacies for the special election, only to have Meyer clear the field almost immediately after he expressed interest.

MARCH 21 UPDATE: Three days later, neither Ras Smith nor Deborah Berry have returned my phone calls or responded to my e-mails asking questions about how they arranged this transfer of power and why Smith was selected over all other potential Democratic candidates living in House district 62.

I forgot to mention that this Facebook thread from March 17 belies Meyer’s claim that “everyone knew about the retirements well in advance.” Democratic State Representatives Abby Finkenauer and Liz Bennett assert that they found out Berry was not running for re-election the day before the filing deadline. I have no reason to doubt their accounts.

For today, I’m interested in what appears to be a pattern of Republicans letting Iowa House seats go in battleground Iowa Senate districts. I suspect a strategy is in play to depress GOTV in the more Democratic halves of these districts.

In any given general election, roughly a dozen or two of the 100 Iowa House districts are in play. A first look through the list of candidates who qualified for the primary ballot suggests that this year, fewer Iowa House districts will be competitive than in 2010 or 2012. Republicans have failed to field a candidate in 32 of the 47 Democratic-held House districts. Democrats have failed to field a candidate in 26 of the 53 Republican-held House districts.

Although a few of these districts may see major-party candidates nominated through special conventions after the primary, it’s rare for late-starting candidates to have a realistic chance to beat an incumbent. (That said, two Iowa House Democrats lost in 2010 to candidates who joined the race over the summer rather than during the primary campaign.)

After the jump I’ve enclosed a full list of the Iowa House districts left unchallenged by one of the major parties. I highlighted the most surprising recruitment failures and what looks like a pattern of uncontested House seats in Senate districts that will be targeted by both parties, which may reflect a deliberate strategy. House incumbents with no fear of losing may slack off on GOTV in one half of a Senate district where every vote may count.

A future post will focus on the ten or fifteen Iowa House races likely to be most competitive this fall.

The Daily Kos database includes Obama and Romney vote totals and percentages for each Iowa House district here. After the jump I’ve incorporated that information and other factors to predict which Iowa House districts will be competitive in 2014. Writing this post has been challenging, because every election cycle brings surprises, and many more seats in the lower chamber will be in play. Unlike the Iowa Senate, where only half of the 50 members are on the ballot in each general election, all 100 Iowa House members are on ballot in every even-numbered year. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the lower chamber.

Preliminary results from the Iowa Secretary of State’s website show that President Barack Obama defeated Mitt Romney in Iowa by 807,146 votes to 720,323 (51.89 percent to 46.31 percent) amid record participation of 1,555,570 voters statewide.

As expected, the president won a plurality of the vote in fewer Iowa counties this year than in 2008, but he did pick up one county that was a big surprise for me. Some thoughts about the presidential vote in Iowa are after the jump, along with maps showing which counties Obama, Romney, and John McCain carried. You can find vote totals for every county on the Iowa Secretary of State’s website.